Biggest bumbler of the year?

posted at 11:00 am on December 31, 2008 by Ed Morrissey

Peter Brown of Quinnipiac wants to balance out Time Magazine’s venerable Person of the Year award by recognizing abject failure and ignominy. Brown launched his first annual Bumbler of the Year, recognizing someone who managed to seize defeat from the jaws of victory on the biggest possible stage this year. In fact, Hillary Clinton didn’t even need a Barackopolis as a backdrop for her Greek tragedy of hubris and incompetence:

It’s too easy to find a bad guy or gal who hurt others. Bernie Madoff, who bilked so many out of so much, would be the runaway winner for 2008.

No, it takes a certain amount of chutzpah to qualify for the “bumbler.” To win, someone has to suffer from a massive self-inflicted wound that by its nature would be a product of ego. …

By contrast, the inaugural “bumbler” goes to Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York. Her name is unlikely to appear in any other sentence in the coming weeks with the word inaugural, although it didn’t have to be that way. …

That’s because if she had not forgotten that February had 29 days in 2008–not just the five for which her campaign planned–she, not Mr. Obama, would almost certainly be taking the presidential oath of office on Jan. 20.

Brown argues that Hillary thought so highly of herself that she and her team assumed the primaries would be over on February 5th, the Super Tuesday when 22 states went to the polls or the caucuses. Team Hillary failed to staff or plan past that date, spending all of their money on the first Tuesday and assuming that they would be far enough ahead not to worry about the rest of the primaries. Of course, as it happened, Obama managed to fight to a draw by out-organizing the Clintonistas in the caucuses, and his forward planning for the rest of February all but knocked Hillary out of the race.

Well, that’s according to Brown. I seem to recall it differently. By the time February 5th actually rolled around, Barack Obama clearly had the wind at his back. He won most of the contests leading up to February 5th, while Hillary finished third in Iowa. She barely beat Obama in New Hampshire with her much-publicized weepy moment on the eve of the primary. She did well in Florida and Michigan, whose results didn’t count, thanks to a rules dispute. By the time February 5th rolled around, Obama’s performance came as no surprise.

In fact, Hillary reorganized after February and almost knocked Obama out of the race. She outperformed him in almost every primary, while Obama held the edge in caucus states. Obama never did clinch the nomination, and it remained an open question whether Obama would hold enough superdelegates to keep the Clintons out of the White House.

If Hillary bumbled, she did so in 2007, not 2008. She allowed Obama into the race with a disastrously bad Philadelphia debate performance in November, where she reversed herself twice on drivers licences for illegal aliens within 120 seconds. She completely undermined her supposed advantage on experience and made Obama seem like a reasonable alternative to another four years of Clintonian double-talk. She never recovered from the blow; Obama made significant gains at her expense in popularity, organization, and fundraising. In 2008, Obama simply outperformed Hillary just enough to squeeze out a win.

If I had to pick a Bumbler of the Year, I’d seriously consider these potential hubristic losers:

Rod Blagojevich — Despite knowing that Patrick Fitzgerald was pursuing a years-long investigation into public corruption in Illinois, Blagojevich managed to get himself on tape saying explicitly what most politicians are smart enough to remain unsaid. Talk about hubris! Did Blagojevich ever think of holding those kinds of conversations off the phone?

Hugo Chavez — He wanted to use his oil-driven economy to transform Venezuela into Cuba. His sulphuric crude now sells for less than $30 per barrel, his electrical service fries appliances in middle-class and poor homes, and economic stagnation has already taken root. I guess he succeeded.

Eliot Spitzer — He didn’t just win higher office by crusading against high-priced prostitution rings … he’s a customer, too! He couldn’t break the habit even after winning New York’s highest office. Most politicians of his rank don’t have to pay for sex, at least not on the front end. Bonus points for subjecting his wife to the scrutiny of the media in his resignation presser.

“Obama made significant gains at her expense in popularity, organization, and fundraising“

Let’s just call it what we know it to be…Illegal Campaign Contributions and Money Laundering. Though we will be reliving these facts in four years if nobody lifts a finger to uncover what his campaign did every Democrat in the nation will be doing the same thing shortly thereafter.

McCain running the lipstick on the pig ad. At the time, he was up (I believe by something like 4 points). He had surged passed Obama on the back of a string of negative ads (one of which, the “kindergarden” ad he was beginning to get flack over, but not too much).

As I recall, this happened just prior to 9/11, when he was going to pull all negative ads (at least for the day). Then Obama made the lipstick on the pig comment and Team McCain started hammering him on it and within a day or two, released this ad.

It backfired big time. Not only did people not buy that Obama was calling Palin a pig or being sexist here (which is obvious when Obama’s quote is shown in the context of talking about McCain’s economic plan), but the ad also exploded the narrative that McCain was running a overly negative campaign. He had escaped that until this point. This ad was the tipping point.

He immediately started losing his lead until Obama again took over never to look back. The “suspension” of his campaign was big too, but he was down at that point and it was seen as a “hail mary” move. This ad, more than any other strategic move — perhaps aside from choosing Palin, but one could make the argument that she helped him as much as hurt him — helped him lose the election.

That’s because if she had not forgotten that February had 29 days in 2008–not just the five for which her campaign planned–she, not Mr. Obama, would almost certainly be taking the presidential oath of office on Jan. 20.

Not so fast. I disagree with Brown here. I don’t think a Clinton victory was a foregone conclusion by any means. I think enough democrats suspected a third Clinton term could be a problem to sell to a general electorate and went with Obama for that reason. And maybe enough democrats didn’t want Clinton anyway. I think Obama got the nomination because he wasn’t Clinton.

Now the question becomes – three weeks before he takes office – WhoTF is he? Well, we have a few ideas…

There are so many ‘bumblers’ in 2008 that it makes more sense to hold a monthly title then let readers choose from the mess. My choices:

1. The Whiney 3 and their private corporate jets.
2. Congress for causing the housing crisis then passing the buck (as usual).
3. The UAW for keeping American automakers from being competitive.
4. AIG Executives who accepted bailout money then handed themselves huge bonuses.
5. The Democrat Party for causing the housing crisis then preventing the Republican Party from adding amendments to what is likely going to be a trillion dollar bailout.
6. Congress for giving themselves a pay raise when ever larger segments of the American population loses their jobs.

Hey Ed, you forgot to add Me, the one and only Knucklehead to your list. I’m the idiot who got excited about the Palin nomination and decided to contribute money to the McCain campaign, even though I’m on a very limited budget.

And my repayment……….I guess either McCain or the RNC sold our names, phones numbers and addresses to every charity group out there and I’m now swamped with calls from every “Concerned Citizen for….(insert the charity of your choice here). I got a new phone a couple years ago, am on the “do not call list” so who else could possibly be bombarding me with these obnoxious 1-800 calls all day?

Well if we are talkin sports, its a toss up between Tony Romo, cracking like a fine piece of China for the last 3 years, any time he is under pressure, starting with the bumbled snap in Seattle, or the Mets losing out on the playoffs, by losing the last game of the season two years in a row.

She didn’t bumble at all in 2008, she killed her chances when she voted for a war that that Dem primary wouldn’t support and prior to the credit crisis was a main issue. If she would have voted against it, yet did all the National Security stuff she did in the Senate she would have won.

If she’s a bumbler then George Allen should be tied with her because he was supposed to the front runner before his 2006 meltdown.

Politically it goes to McCain hands down. Regardless of what people on this site may think his schizophrenic campaign did come off as “erratic”. When your trying to paint the other guy as untested and unpredictable its hard to get it to stick when your jumping all over the place. If ol hothead could have kept his cool so many people wouldn’t have become more comfortable with a President Obama. Not vetting or properly coaching Palin was important too. The pick still could have been good for identity politics reasons, which was the only reason she was picked, but if they could have stuffed her with more than buzzword and generic talking point answers at least she would have been less of a sideshow.

How do you go from contender for the Presidency, king/queenmaker with leverage to get a plum appointment in any Democrat administration, and prominent public voice to creepy ambulance chasing cheater without bumbling? Put another way, Edwards future political career was lost for want of a condom.

Hillary a bumbler? That’s laughable. You might want to take a look at McCain. He lost because he couldn’t get Republicans to the polls. Hillary actually got more votes than Obama, so she’s one up on McCain in that front. She lost because the fix was in from the beginning. Brazile moved several states up to earlier voting that had higher AA populations, and Brazile said she would punish the voters of Michigan and Florida. Then the caucus fraud that went unreported by the MSM and pushed aside by the Democratic Party. Then there was the shameful committee meeting about Michigan and Florida. After that, there was the buyout of Superdelegates by Obama and bringing them out after every state that Hillary would win. And who could forget the MSM calling for Hillary to drop out?

I’m sorry, but anyone that goes through that kind of shit and comes out clean in no bumbler.

I submit that both Hillary and O’Bama were “affirmative action” candidates, qualified for the presidency, according to the dems (and the MSM) solely on the basis of race and gender, certainly not on the ability to handle the presidency. I, too, think there was no way Hillary was going to get the nomination with Barack in the race, but I sure enjoyed hearing and reading about her incredibly dysfunctional and sparring campaign staff!

Although I don’t much like McCain, I really don’t think he had a chance against The One. I don’t think anyone would have had a chance.

No one could criticize the One in the Media without the Race Card being played by someone. The American Public voted for the shiny candidate, not the qualified one because we live in the reality of “American Idol” country. McCain was painted as a psychotic, ill tempered man who allegedly had an affair with a lobbyist. Palin was not allowed to be herself without everyone shooting at her. Biden is a moron, but the media pretty much ignored him because of that. Obama could do no wrong, in the eyes of everyone, even the Victory Lap Tour was made of awesome (I found it arrogant and presumptuous). It’s a shame he didn’t go to the Sea of Galilee and walk on water whilst on the trip.

The American Public voted for the shiny candidate, not the qualified one because we live in the reality of “American Idol” country the only qualified candidate was stuck playing second fiddle to John McCain.

It’s no contest for Bumbler of the year….McCain. He had the election in September and could have held the lead if he hadn’t stupidly gone to Washington to vote yes for Socialism.

It would be a dead heat with the Hildabeast except that as Ed says, her bumbling was in 2007.

Number 2 in 2008 is Bush, who squandered his legacy by not waiting 5 minutes to talk to somebody else when his uber-lib economic advisors told him the world would end if he didn’t convert the country to socialism immediately. The only reason he is number 2 is that McCain had more time to think about HIS idiocy.

My pick is the New England Patriots. After becoming the first team in history to have a perfect regular season record in 2007 they were able to beat Jacksonville and San Diego to advance to the super-bowl and a chance at a perfect 19-0 season. They got to play the last seated team in the NFC, the New York Giants who had won 3 playoff road games to make it to the super-bowl. In the end the Patriots blew it 17-14 and their luck in 2008 continues as they went on to become only the 2nd team in history to finish the regular season with an 11-5 record and miss the playoffs.

I have to give a tie between Maverick and the RNC…..both proved to be world class idiots. To buttress my opinion, I offer as Exhibit A – the election of the vacuous empty suit from Chicago, Exhibit B – the gang of 10 that killed the oil issue, Exhibit C – anyone repub that voted for the bailout bill……I rest my case.

but the ad also exploded the narrative that McCain was running a overly negative campaign. He had escaped that until this point. This ad was the tipping point.

Tom_Shipley on December 31, 2008 at 11:25 AM

That’s a good one. Seriously, you should have Maher’s job.

McCain lost, in part, because he ran the least “negative” presidential campaign in recent memory. And really after Obama released the spanish language ad accusing John McAmnesty of being a Limbaugh clone on illegal immigration, the gloves should have come off.

We can blame the media for the fact that Obama faced no serious vetting to an extent, but McCain shares a large share of the blame too.

Spitzer wins it handsdown. Hillary was not the first candidate to stumble out of Iowa shell-shocked. The media’s infatuation with Obama and their sudden acceptance of political sexism worked against her. For sure, she f’ed up but she had enough help to not deserve the title.

Spitzer, on the other hand, screwed up in so many ways and brought it all on himself. He could have banged a secretary like most people but instead decided to use hookers — something he was well known as a crusader against.

Hillary goes into 2009 all but assured a gig as Secretary of State. Spitzer writes a column for Salon. Yeah, Spitzer is the biggest bumbler of the year.

ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) – Sen. Bill Clinton? Don’t completely rule it out.
The former president is among several boldface names being touted as possible “caretakers” for New York’s Senate seat—people who would serve until the 2010 elections but wouldn’t be interested in running to keep the job. As the process of picking Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s replacement gets messier, the option may become increasingly attractive to Gov. David Paterson, who has sole authority to name a successor.

A big name like Bill Clinton or Democratic former Gov. Mario Cuomo could have an immediate impact for New York in the Senate while letting the large field of hopefuls duke it out in 2010, according to three Democratic Party advisers in New York and Washington who are close to the discussion with Paterson’s inner circle on this issue.

Two others in the party confirmed that Paterson is still considering the caretaker option. The advisers spoke on the condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to comment.

“You could find a very senior person who could serve New York well” on an interim basis, said Gerald Benjamin, a political scientist and dean at the State University of New York at New Paltz. “Then you can say to Caroline Kennedy, `You know, you’d make a good senator. Run for it.’ And you can tell everyone else that it’s a level playing field.”

Paterson has made it clear in recent days that he’s getting annoyed by the constant jockeying by supporters of high-powered hopefuls including Kennedy, half a dozen members of Congress and state Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, son of the former governor.

John McNumbNuts suspending his campaign to go to Washington to get the $700Billion passed (and now we can’t figure out where $350Billion of it went) is the fumble of the decade! But hey…he crossed party lines and kissed Barney Frank’s ass…